Cilt/Volume II Sayı/Number 1 Nisan/April 2009 Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi/Journal of Social Sciences 113 WHY DO BUREAUCRATS PUSH FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM? PROPOSING A MODEL OF BUREAUCRATIC BEHAVIOR Mete YILDIZ∗ Uğur ÖMÜRGÖNÜLSEN∗∗ __________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT Bureaucrats are usually portrayed as the firmest resisters against change. As a very visible exception to this tendency, Provincial Governor Mr. Recep Yazicioglu (1948- 2003) had long been considered a very vocal advocate for administrative reform in Turkey. For the last three decades, he criticized the excessive centralization, ineffectiveness, inefficiency, and unresponsiveness problems that plague the Turkish public bureaucracy. By using literature review, archival search and in-depth semi-structured interview methods, this study examines Governor Yazicioglu’s life, career, accomplishments, and evaluates the applicability of the concepts of “exemplary public administrator” (Cooper and Wright, 1992), “public service motivation” (Perry and Wise, 1990) and “exit, voice and loyalty” (Hirschman, 1970) in a non-U.S. setting. It is concluded that these concepts can be useful in explaining exemplary bureaucratic behavior in the Turkish bureaucracy when they are combined with several additional explanatory factors (i.e. political environment, positive examples, amount of risk of being a critic, longevity of criticism, providing successful examples of implementation, support of the media, and support of citizens) within a proposed behavioral model that is applicable internationally. Keywords: Administrative reform, bureaucratic behavior, exemplary public administrators ∗ Dr., Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Kamu Yönetimi ve Siyaset Bilimi Bölümü E-posta: [email protected] ∗ ∗ Dr., Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Kamu Yönetimi ve Siyaset Bilimi Bölümü E-posta: [email protected] YDÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, C. II, No. 1, (Nisan 2009) We would like to thank Muhittin Acar, George Chandler, Terry Cooper, Nevio Cristante, I. Erol Kozak, Aylin Ozman, Laurie Paarlberg, Jim Perry, Hasan Huseyin Yildiz, Lois Wise and three anonymous referees of the 2001 Academy of Management Conference who have read previous versions of this paper and provided valuable suggestions for improvement. 114 Cilt/Volume II Sayı/Number 1 Nisan/April 2009 Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi/Journal of Social Sciences ÖZET Bürokratlar genellikle değişime karşı sert direnişçiler olarak betimlenirler. Bu yönelime çok görünür bir örnek, uzun süre yönetim reformu konusundaki görüşlerini yüksek sesle dile getiren Vali Recep Yazıcıoğlu’dur (1948-2003). Yazıcıoğlu, yaşamının son otuz yılında Türk kamu bürokrasisinin temel sorunları olan aşırı merkeziyetçiliği, etkin ve etkili hizmet verilememesini, yönetilenlerden gelen isteklere bürokrasinin duyarsızlığını eleştirmiştir. Bu çalışmada alan yazını taraması, arşiv analizi ve açık uçlu soruların sorulduğu yarı-yapılandırılmış mülakat yöntemleri kullanılarak Vali Yazıcıoğlu’nun hayatı ve çalışmaları incelenmiştir. Bu incelemede, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri kamu ve işletme yönetimi alan yazınlarında üretilen “örnek kamu yöneticileri” (Cooper ve Wright, 1992), “kamu hizmeti güdülenmesi” (Perry ve Wise, 1990) ile “terk, itiraz ve itaat” (Hirschman, 1970) kavramları incelenen konunun çözümlenmesinde anlamlı bir katkı yapmışlardır. Gerçekleştirilen analizde bu kavramlara ek olarak, bazı başka değişkenler de (siyasal çevre, olumlu örnekler, eleştirel olmanın riski, eleştirinin süresi, başarılı uygulama örnekleri vermek, basın ve vatandaş desteği, vb.) kullanılmıştır. Yapılan analizin sonunda yönetim reformunun savunan bürokratları güdüleyen etmenler konusunda başka ülkelerdeki örnek olaylara da uygulanabilecek bir davranışsal model önerilmiştir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Yönetsel reform, bürokratik davranış, örnek kamu yöneticil 1. Introduction Rainey and Wise (1999, p. 127) argue that bureaucrats have been stereotyped as the firmest resisters of change, and the politicians defend their reform agendas as efforts to stimulate this change-resistant public bureaucracy. However, Rainey and Steinbauer (1999, p. 1-2) argue that this may not necessarily be the case. Public organizations may well be what they call as “galloping elephants”. An elephant is a large and cumbersome being. Yet, it can run fast and it is quite sensitive to the changes in its environment. Similarly, the public organizations and bureaucrats may well be sensitive and adaptive to their changing environment. Rainey and Wise (p. 127), for example, argue that we do not have clear evidence of the alleged resistance to change by the public organizations and bureaucrats. They also emphasize the importance of the international perspective in understanding the dynamics of change processes although there may be differences because of different cultures and political institutions. Rainey and Wise contend that the patterns of variation and commonality may present significant learning opportunities from both theoretical and practical viewpoints. This article presents a case study from Turkey in order to benefit from an international perspective, and understand the nature and development of the demands for administrative change among bureaucrats. Bureaucrats in Turkey are not famous for their eccentric behaviors. That is exactly why it was always interesting for Turkish media correspondents to follow the Cilt/Volume II Sayı/Number 1 Nisan/April 2009 Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi/Journal of Social Sciences 115 Provincial Governor,1 Mr. Recep Yazicioglu, while he water-skied, climbed trees to eat fruits (Ozdemir, 1999), or rafted through wild rivers. It is ironic that Governor Yazicioglu’s unconventional and ‘unstatesmanly’ behaviors attracted more media and thus public attention than his decades-long and very serious criticisms against the excessive centralization, ineffectiveness, inefficiency, and unresponsiveness of the Turkish administrative system, or his successful efforts for local social and economic development. Such misplaced attention may shape Governor Yazicioglu’s legacy as an eccentric bureaucrat, rather than that of a reform advocate and a civic educator that he really was. The study is not meant to be an elegy to the governor. On the contrary, it both examines his flaws such as being an authoritarian but paternalist bureaucrat at times, and his life, career, accomplishments and qualities as a moral exemplar in the Turkish public administration system. The objective is to document the motivations of a bureaucrat who risks his career by vocally demanding administrative and political change, a situation and a behavioral model which have comparative and global applications. 2. Methodology The research of this study will be directed to answering this question: “what are the factors that motivate a bureaucrat to do what he/she believes is right (in this case, demanding administrative and political change) despite the risk of punishment by his/her superiors for such actions?”. By using literature review, archival search and in-depth semi-structured interview methods, this study suggest a model that tests the applicability of the concepts of “exemplary public administrator” (Cooper and Wright, 1992), “public service motivation” (Perry and Wise, 1990) and “exit, voice and loyalty” (Hirschman, 1970) in a non-U.S. setting. The literature review and archival search of newspaper articles about the governor are used to prepare the questions, which were asked to Governor Yazicioglu during the interview, eight months before his death after a traffic accident. The list of interview questions is presented in the Appendix. 1 Turkey is a unitary state. (Provincial) Governors (vali) in Turkey are not elected like their counterparts in the U.S. Instead, they are appointed by the central government in Ankara. A provincial governor is the highest-level appointed civil servant (administrative agent of the central government) in a province. Still, this position is not a career civil servant position. Rather, it is an “exceptional” bureaucratic position; it has a political dimension to it as well. 116 Cilt/Volume II Sayı/Number 1 Nisan/April 2009 Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi/Journal of Social Sciences 3. Theoretical Constructs Three theoretical constructs are used for analyzing Mr. Yazicioglu’s behavior: The first and the main theoretical construct of this study is the concept of ‘exemplary public administrator’ by Cooper and Wright (1992). In the same book, Hart (1992) argues that there exists a paradox in public opinion, which is signaled by a confidence in the institutions, but a lack of confidence in the leaders of those institutions (p. 9). Hart contends that the American society no longer sees visible exemplars of moral courage, fidelity and trustworthiness (p. 10). The existence and visibility of these moral exemplars, however, are very critical, since they provide us with standards and inspiration: they represent the ideals of a society (p. 13). Hart underlines the moral context of the exemplary public administrators (p. 21-27). He divides the incidences of moral exemplars into two categories according to the longevity of the exemplary behavior, and the amount of risk born by the exemplar: Moral episodes are the brief instances of moral and exemplary behavior, while moral processes are extended periods. In other words, having a moral process is engaging in the exemplary behavior as a way of life. In addition to this theoretical background, Cooper and Wright examined the cases of eleven American bureaucrats, who they